Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 14:21:19 -0600 From: Chris Warren <chris@dawgiestyle.com> To: cs <cs-fbsd@ctzen.com> Cc: FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is this possible ? inherit group permissions Message-ID: <1116879679.11570.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <4292399E.30107@ctzen.com> References: <42900CC6.4090701@ctzen.com> <44wtpq13lu.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <20050523093759.M47072@mail.goinet.com> <44u0ktzufo.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <4292399E.30107@ctzen.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] Just a guess, but would the sticky bit help here? Chris On Mon, 2005-23-05 at 16:14 -0400, cs wrote: > Lowell Gilbert wrote: > > Tony Shadwick <tshadwick@goinet.com> writes: > > > > > >>On Mon, 23 May 2005, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > >> > >> > >>>cs <cs-fbsd@ctzen.com> writes: > >>> > >>> > >>>>For a directory, e.g. foo/, if I chmod 775 foo/, is it possible for > >>>>newly created files and directories under foo/ to automagically > >>>>inherit the group permissions of foo ? > >>>> > >>>>e.g. > >>>>touch foo/test would be rw-rw-r-- > >>>>mkdir foo/sub would be rwxrwxr-x > >>>> > >>>>I am looking for a non umask solution. > >>>> > >>>>I seem to remember in debian, I was able to make the group permissions > >>>>of the parent directory special for this magic to occur. > >>>> > >>>>I wonder if there is something similar in FBSD. > >>> > >>>If you set the suid bit, both owner *and* group will be set. > > > > > >>I'll have to remember that one. So if /home is a filesystem unto > >>itself, if you set the suid bit on /home, all further creation beneath > >>it will inherit the permissions you set above? > > > > > > Only *directly* underneath it. Obviously you wouldn't want to do that > > for /home, but I find it quite useful on shared project directories > > and the like. > > If you are talking about inheriting group identity, that is not what I > am asking for. I believe this is automagic under fbsd, e.g. > > mkdir foo > chgrp somegroup foo > touch foo/foofile > mkdir foo/foodir > > foo/foofile and foo/foodir will have gid somegroup (without any suid or > sgid). > > What I am more interested in is inherting group permissions. > > For example, I have a directory /var/www/foosite, which allows several > different users to maintain it. > > One way to do it is to use a common account for all the users to > maintain foosite. > > But it is "too loose" in accountability. > > Going full version control (cvs/subversion) is not really desired for me > because it's not a "mission critical" thing. > > What I would like to do is create a group (say foogroup), assign all > maintainers to the group, chgrp foogroup /var/www/foosite, and chmod g+w > /var/www/foosite. > > Here is the "fun" part. > > User umask is 022 (which I would like to maintain). > > touch foosite/foofile > mkdir foosite/foodir > > would render those new file/dir NOT group writable. > > umask 002 would make them group writable BUT it is a "global" setting > and would affect other parts of the file system as well (e.g. user's home). > > Plus not all users are savvy enough to do umask 002 / umask 022 whenever > necessary. > > I am looking for an "elegant" solution which I doubt I will find. > > After some thoughs, this is my "compromized" solution. > > The users will maintain foosite via ftp (within a VPN), and I use vsftpd > and set the ftp umask to 002. > > -cs > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCkjs+5oLdYlMF6RsRAugKAKCJrwdvImFkkGssACVDZBBw9JQ2HgCeJfva koxfEiznp5bzYS9L9965mP8= =uXtZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1116879679.11570.0.camel>